Talk:Dragon
Name Debate Okay, I respect the new naming system, but why was the "Bomber" enemy changed to "Dragon"? Bomber fits more to the enemy species. --Yonder 19:39, 18 January 2009 (UTC) :Well, currently I am fine with both names. But "Dragon" is a name based on the look, while "Bomber" is a name based on the behavior. But there is a small change that a future update might bring a dragon which exactly looks like the current bombers but which has another attack and doesn't "bomb" anymore. If it's shooting spikes, fire, waves or anything which doesn't simply drop down, the name "Bomber" would be wrong. --Justme2 20:32, 18 January 2009 (UTC) In a statement similiar to Yonder's, wouldn't a name like "Balloon" be better than "Dragon", since the enemy looks more like a balloon than a dragon. If you have a comment about how the Gel head doesn't look like a balloon, go to a balloon store and truthfully tell me that there isn't a balloon that looks a bit like the Gel head. -Combak 16:20, 16 June 2009 (UTC) : You are right (although I've never seen a balloon store in Germany). Well, but a dragon is a living creature. A balloon is just a dead object. --Justme2 23:03, 16 June 2009 (UTC) : For the record, the word is inanimate, not inanimate. (But it doesn't really matter.) Also, isn't a Wheel also inanimate? - Combak 17:18, 27 June 2009 (UTC) :: Hmm, good point! Btw: "balloon" was also suggestest for the Gel head (see Talk:Seaside 3). :: ("inanimate" ... good to know, because in German you can also use "dead", if you want to express in a deprecative way, that something is "inanimate") --Justme2 12:52, 28 June 2009 (UTC) OK, here is the solution: we vote. Vote in the same way you should on the featured article and featured media. Don't forget your reason! (But keep it short!) -- ''page/ '' 21:29, September 27, 2009 (UTC) The vote below is closed. Do NOT add more votes into this. 'Dragon' Dragon - Why? Because of its movement. IT is also a little more fitting... Mr. Guy 00:19, September 28, 2009 (UTC) Dragon - I called them dragons even before I found this wiki -- page • talk 20:54, October 23, 2009 (UTC) Dragon - I agree with Weltall. Also, Dragon doesn't sound as silly as Balloon and naturally sounds better. --Yonder 21:22, October 23, 2009 (UTC) Dragon - Yeah, balloon sounds like a really silly name, like a 5-year-old made it up. Jekr 06:19, November 15, 2009 (UTC) Dragon - I'm not actually voting for Dragon, I'm voting against Balloon. ''page/ '' 15:38, November 15, 2009 (UTC) Dragon - I like Dragon better and I agree with Yonder --Hunt286 22:00, December 27, 2009 (UTC) Dragon- '''I think that dragon sounds better and i doubt balloon is a good name for it can be destroyed by a stick '''Dragon-I vote for dragon because I do not like the name balloon, I think that balloon does not go very well with this enemy. 'Balloon' Balloon- I vote for balloon, for the reasons stated above.-- ''page/ '' 21:29, September 27, 2009 (UTC) Balloon - I wonder how they look like dragons Sockes 09:03, November 17, 2009 (UTC) :isn't it inspired by the kite-dragon?--Majorlee 09:51, November 17, 2009 (UTC) Balloon '''- It looks a lot like one. 22:01, April 12, 2010 (UTC) '''Balloon - Dragon is a bad name.I like the name balloon.It very lot look a balloon.Very dont look a dragon.Poisonshot 15:51, December 12, 2010 (UTC) The vote above is closed. Do NOT add more votes into this. "Smallest Species" and the problem with the superlative Somebody has added the following information to the article: "This is the smallest species in the game (so far)." This is completely correct, but it should not be on the article pages. The reason is, that such sentences cause great problems for the wiki at future updates of the game. Every update can turn such a sentence into a wrong statement. The difficulty is to find such wrong information. For example, think about the Mushrooms. Before V3.1, the dragons were the smallest species. In V3.1 the forest stage with the mushrooms was introduced. Suddenly the dragons were no longer the smallest species, but the two mushrooms were. An update which doesn't have anything to do with dragons, changes a statement on the dragon article. Nobody would have thought about it. And why should we? The update wasn't about dragons. And again, in V3.2 the statment for the smallest species again would have to flip back to the dragons, because of the two mushrooms in Forest 2. Because of this we should try to avoid such problematical superlatives if possible. Especially if they are of little or no use to the reader. The "smallest species" doesn't have any meaning in the game. It has no influence on the game play. In contrast to this, the "weakest species" or "most dangerous species" would at least carry some usefull information, like telling those are enmies which are easy or very hard to defeat. (These are just examples. Do not use them, because there is no clean definition for "weak" or "dangerous", which would be applicable to a species.) Therefore simply try to avoid superlatives if they are not necessary for the article and its significance. --Justme2 23:48, 11 March 2009 (UTC) Dragon, because i doubt danball world make a "bloon" as an opponent Baloon is a very good name!Poisonshot 23:23, December 10, 2010 (UTC) Dragon to name I dont like dragon to name of this species because is very dont look a dragon. How dragon look if is one How balloon look. The poisoner 01:34, December 30, 2010 (UTC) Why a dragon can look that?If is the kite-dragon,turn it to this name! I agree, plus, What? I dont get to vote on this issue just because I joined after you closed the vote? Now thats wrong newbie haters.ZoshiX 21:46, January 5, 2011 (UTC) Per both of you guys... But the problem is that the voting ended only recently. It'll take a while before many people will agree to another voting session. It would be pointless to have another vote a month after the previous one ended. [[User:Waddle D33|'Wad']][[User Talk: Waddle D33|'dle']] 22:03, January 9, 2011 (UTC)